Slashdot Mirror
Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence
An anonymous reader notes that President Bush has decided to commute Scooter Libby's sentence after numerous appeals failed. Libby was convicted in March of obstruction of justice in connection with the Valerie Plame affair. The President's action spares Libby from 30 months behind bars."
It's true the President has that kind of power, but isn't he supposed to at least try to seem impartial and not at all corrupt?
Are there any stipulations regarding the Presidential use of power at all?
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
... and perfectly legal, in this case.
Still, I guess it just goes to show that now, perjury is OK!
I must also strongly agree with Joe Wilson: "Scooter Libby is a traitor." I certainly hope that those responsible for the egregious breach of national security are convicted as such.
He could have pardoned Libby. Then Libby could continue to practice law and wouldn't have to pay the fine. Well, I don't think anybody thinks the fine will come out of his own pocket. And look forward to a pardon when Bush leaves office, which should not be under honorable circumstances.
Nerds are people first and nerds second, and as people, we should all be concerned about the actions of thus most unctuous and corrupt government.
Apparently our leader has decided that being shamed in front of your family and having your reputation tarnished plus being fined a nominal fee is enough of a punishment for high crimes against the government. Surely such things a possessing a few ounces of pot then deserve nothing more than a vicious finger-wagging, right? ....right?
Outing an active agent is an act of treason which, if I recall correctly, is still punishable by death in the US. Whether Libby, Rove, or Cheney did it doesn't (and shouldn't) matter.
This so-called administration has broken, no--pulverized--their oaths of office.
I'm firmly convinced that we haven't had the Democracy we were promised in America since 1963.
While JFK and those before him were not perfect men, at least they tried to uphold the principals of this nation for the greater good of all Americans.
With this administration so blatent with it's lies and contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution and with FOX pundits who often say they wish they could imprison or even kill Democrats or "lefties", I am convinced this nation is under the control of anarchists who wish to push this nation to civil war. And it's not Repubilicans vs Democrat... because the Democrats are hardly a better choice, but a division vbetween those who believe in the Constitution and individual rights, and those who want a Statist system where there is no longer any accountability.
And I hope they keep pushing. Because I'm begining to believe that the time for the ballor box is nearing it's end and all we'll be left with is teh ammo box for casting our votes. The people will only be able to abide by so many offenses. If this blatent lawlessness continues to prevail, the people will sooner or later stand up, and some of those people will be Generals and Admirals within our military.
Does this view sound extreme? Yes.
But I hardly think it's far fetched.
I'm sure there are a lot of people whose frustration is turning to anger and disgust.
You could always, y'know, not visit Politics thread. It's not like you clicked on the "Bush Commutes Libby's Sentence" headline and went, "OH MY GOD POLITICS!! I had NO WARNING!" Seriously, what were you expecting? Discourses on the implementation of preemptive scheduling in the 2.6 kernel?
'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
So conveniently close to a holiday, too. A large number of people are on vacation, and both vacationers and everyone else will be too busy playing with booze and fireworks to give this much consideration.
The Internet is full. Go away.
Halliburton owes Cheney for a lot of no-bid contracts. Cheney owes Scooter for muddying the waters in the Plame affair. Any bets on whether Scooter lands a choice position at Halliburton in the near future?
pardons and commutations since the Nixon pardon. And, perhaps, the Marc Rich pardon as well. My head is swimming. The President just commuted the sentence of a key insider to the executive branch, who committed felonies while on executive-branch time, and who hadn't even served a single day in jail. Further, he has a record of not commuting or pardoning offenders. From Carla Fey Tucker, the murderer he refused to pardon after she found Christ, to just about everyone else who has requested it during his presidency. But Scooter Libby, a man who alocuted his crimes before the court in order to receive a reduced sentence, has now just skated free.
This absolutely reeks of conflict of interest. I am ashamed of my government.
Perhaps the worst part of this travesty of justice is that by doing this rather than pardoning him, this traitor still can continue to appeal, and Still will have the ability to plead the 5th in other cases related to the matter. in other words he can Cover of Bush and Cheney by pleading the 5th because he case is not pardoned. How convienant.
I Need someone to rebuild a Digitech Digital Delay pedal for me....for me...for me...for me.
Once again, Bush the GREAT shows exactly how to chart a course for fairness, justice and truth. I think it was obvious to everyone that Scooter was the target of a Whitewater-esque witch hunt that had more to do with trying to pay back the Clinton investigations than it did any real crime, and I think the commute was fair. I used to think that history might only place Bush in the top ten of America's greatest presidents, perhaps behind Roosevelt in the last century, but now, I'm not sure that Bush might even be slighted by that.
Could it be that George W. Bush should be in the top 5 of America's greatest presidents?
THREE CHEERS FOR BUSH THE GREAT!
This is my sig.
Dick Cheney has frequently alluded that he is above the law in every respect, do you really think that his aides are any different? More proof that rich white guys almost never go to jail.
And Bush commutes his measley 30 months in jail while still doing nothing for Ramos and Compean who are serving 11 and 12 year sentences for DOING THEIR JOBS as border patrol agents.
What a crock justice is in the country. I have no respect for the law at all anymore.
signed;
A disgusted citizen of a corrupt nation.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
how does that make this in any way acceptable?
this has to be the worst excuse for accepting this kind of behavior that's ever been uttered
"Mr. Libby was sentenced to thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation. I respect the jury's verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison."--President Bush.
If Bush is citing the probation office's advice, what was that advice? How long was the lesser sentence? Zero, no jail time at all? If not, then why did Bush let Libby off scot free? What is the jail term Bush thinks is appropriate for perjury and objstruction of justice, and why was Libby not required to serve that term?
And why does Bush say "I respect the jury's verdict," when he patently does not respect the jury's verdict? What could possibly constitute more disrespect than setting the verdict aside?
raise your hand if you ever thought you'd daydream of a world where dan quayle was president.
JESUS!
I can't believe you just said that. And I can't believe I'm actually considering it. And I can't actually believe QUAYLE WOULD'VE BEEN BETTER!
I need to wash my brain.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
None of those 140 worked for him or committed their crimes while acting in their capacity as a public official.
Yes, they sure will...
There are a number of "who didn't see this coming" posts. Well, the political analysts didn't see it coming. The expectation was a full pardon after the election and before he left office. Instead, he let the conviction stand and gave him a "get out of jail free" card. Well, overall, I think it's worse for Scooter, seeing as how he'll still be a convicted felon, but at least this way he won't have to see the inside of a jail cell. But Bush claiming all sorts of moral superiority and treating his friends like the law doesn't apply to them is going to cost them in the election. Even the Republicans will be running on a "get the Republicans out of office" platform. We have surges that are not showing results from a war the administration knew was based off faulty inteligence. We have a leader who was on the "perjury is bad" bandwagon when it was the previous president, yet says it isn't a crime worth seeing the inside of a jail cell when it is a friend that does it to cover up what could have been treason.
It was always expected. It may even have been justified (Scooter took one for the team, so the team is helping him out), but it was expected that such decisions would wait until after the election. Maybe he's hoping that people will forget about it by then, or that his approval is so low that it doesn't matter anymore.
Learn to love Alaska
In my opinion a 2.5 year prison term is not excessive for a federal official lying to federal investigators in an effort to mislead the american people.
A guy can get more time than that for personal marijuana possession. Which is worse, possessing some plant leaves, or conspiring to mislead the 280 million american citizens you are sworn to serve?
For me the really depressing part is that I have zero confidence that we will ever bring these criminals to justice. They're raping our economy, our brave soldiers, our rights, and our dignity, and it really seems there is not a thing we can do about it but grit our teeth and bare it out. This news just drives home that point.
IMHO, second to getting out of Iraq, my top priority as a voter for the next administration is to prosecute these criminals until they are old and infirm if that is what it takes. We must not let them retire to the easy life of private sector profiteering they think they have to look forward to, the life that Bush Sr. enjoys.
It is the duty of this generation to send a message down through history: fool us once, shame on us, fool us agai... you can't fool us again, because this nation will pursue you to the grave; the american people not rest until you and all your cronies are made to account for the wrongs you have committed against us and against the world in our name. Never Again.
The CIA has explicitly stated that Plame was covert. See Plame employment report. You could also see MSNBC's commentary.
- During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover.
- Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.
- At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14,2003, Ms. Wilsonâ(TM)s CIA employment status was covert.
- This was classified information.
However convenient it would be for Libby and Bush if your claim were true, it just isn't.This may be the first major act by President Bush that is unquestionably constitutional.
Tomorrow night on Countdown (8pm ET), Olbermann will call on Bush & Cheney to resign.
This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
But never once "outing" a CIA agent ...
I'd have to say that there is a noticeable difference between the two acts.
Perjuring yourself over a consensual blow job is a crime.
Perjuring yourself to cover "outing" a CIA agent if MOTHER-FUCKING TREASON.
(1) How serious people think the crime is seems to be only dependant on what colour team they support: either (blue) "Complicit in the outing of a CIA operative - bordering on treason!" or (red) "No crime (she wasn't a covert operative), no harm (he had nothing to do with the news stories), no foul". Who is right? Who cares?
(2) accusations of potentially politically motivated judicial decisions: The penalty given, and the refusal to allow appeals before incarceration has been argued to be at least marginally unusual for this sort of case (IANAL, but I've occasionally glanced at Google News), like the blue team finding a chance to make the red team make themselves look bad by drawing commutation out of wildly unpopular red team president: maybe, maybe not, but in this climate, who is to say? (hint, if you support the red team, the judgement was wrong and politically motivated. If you support Blue team, it was just and right and appropriate to the seriousness of the crime - see (1))
(3) Shrill condemnation for a completely inevitable act by the red team: but, regardless of what team is in power, what do you expect? Either they honestly believe that the judgement was a miscarriage of justice (in which case, what else is the power to commute sentences supposed to be for) or he was actually up to no good, on orders from the government (in which case leaving the guy out to dry would go past the line of unethical). See (1) for a guide on how you should fall on this.
Is this fiasco really factor for anyone? Wouldn't it be better if we stuck to what is *really* bothering us? There is plenty there, and it actually matters!
Funny that you should mention Marc Rich, a financier involved in the Iran Contra affair and the BCCI banking scandal. Guess who his lawyer was?
Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
k.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
Cheney is taking Scooter hunting.
How nice of Dubya to pardon a guy who was probably holding a lot of dirt about his administration in his back pocket.
In the meantime, some kid in his 20s is rotting in a Georgia jail for having consensual sex when he was 17 and she was 15.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/11/teen.sex.case/
Obstruction of justice okay. Getting a blow job, no. Consistent with the Republican party's approach to Clinton I guess.
Who is going to commute Bush's sentence?
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
It's because he found out that Libby wasn't going to be sent to a 'white-collar resort' prison. No, he was going to a federal 'pound me in the ass' prison.
And Libby didn't want to go to any prison.
Isn't it a wonderful country where people who are convicted of a crime don't have to serve the time but American citizens can be held in military brigs for years before they are even charged with a crime?
God bless America...
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Whenever I see corruption like this I remind myself of our Founder's absolute GENIUS. The legislative branch creates independent prosecutor to investigate executive branch -> the people convict -> the judicial branch sentences -> the executive branch commutes -> the legislative branch goes nuts. It's a perfect series of checks and balances.
Meanwhile, we go about our lives content with the knowledge that our government is far too involved arguing about whether some exec in the Vice-President's office lied about an investigation in which a crime may or may not have actually been committed (no one was ever charged) to actually scheme up ways to consolidate power and threaten the Peoples' freedom. And in the end, no branch got too much say and it was the people who were required to actually convict the dude.
Thank you Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, and Hamilton. This was the true gift of our Founding Fathers; not a perfect government. They knew that men will never change.
Here's the response I sent to someone who argued that the commutation was just:
He was an extremely high ranking government official who lied to the FBI to protect the guilty. When that sort of thing is treated lightly, it sends a clear message to the public that our government is about politics and power, not about justice.
FWIW, I also think Rep Jefferson (D-LA) should be put under the jail.
The reason is this: a fine to Scooter Libby means exactly nothing. The PNAC will pay it for him. Moreover, for every Jefferson or Libby that gets caught, fifty scurry free through the halls of DC. And furthermore, the stakes are enormous. Libby will have power beyond yours or my imagining for the rest of his life for what he did. The only way to disincentivize the behavior, when one in fifty get caught and the rewards are frankly beyond my comprehension, is to make the penalty leviathan.
Why do you suppose our politicians are so corrupt? Is it because they are bad people? No. It is because they are human and they are faced with enormous profit and zero downside. No one could be expected to maintain their moral integrity in the face of that. We have to help them stand their ground, by making corruption unthinkable.
The only other option is to let it keep happening, and watch our nation continue to erode.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
If it was a political story related to tech I'd understand it being on slashdot.
But what the hell is this story on the front page of Slashdot for?
No, he was going to a federal 'pound me in the ass' prison.
I simply don't understand why this is a humouous meme in our culture.
To the right, one would think that gay male rape would be regarded as a sin and a gross violation of manhood.
To the left, one would think that prison abuse happening on a widespread scale should be something that a civil society should abhor.
To the notion of American individual rights, one would think that being sentenced to rape is a cruel and unusual punishment.
As is, it is treated flippantly.
Shame on any of you who think this is funny. Prison rape is NOT a fucking joke! It is a disgusting violation of human rights and the persistant and wicked idea that it's either funny or representative of justice that someone be sentenced to RAPE is the primary reason why it continues.
If you think my condemnation of you rape advocates is unfair, then I would like either a "liberal" or a "conservative" to make a strong, compelling case why any crime which merits prison time be "rape by default". Please tell me how exactly that represents "justice" to you.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
The portion of the act grabbed onto by many right-wing radio talk show hosts in the past few years has been the extra-US service portion. It states that in order to qualify as covert, an agent has to have served outside the US in the 5 years previous to the outing.
Well, news flash, Plame did serve overseas in the 5 years prior to her outing. She traveled overseas at the specific behest of the CIA many, many times during the 5 years prior to her outing. Sometimes she even traveled under an assumed name.
Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
"The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
Plame was not only covert at the time of her outing, by working overseas for the CIA whilst under cover, she was most definitely covert under the terms of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
In point of fact, Bill Clinton was not convicted of the same crime. The reason being that he technically did not perjure himself. Yes, there was a "lie of omission", but that is not perjury. So really there's no decriminalization due to Clinton since there wasn't an actual crime.
(The bar association has ethics rules that DO ban "lies of omission". Hence Clinton's disbarrment)
Many out outraged over this because the people campaigning for and cheering Libby's pardon were the same people who were claiming perjury and obstruction of justice were serious enough to impeach Clinton, when he hadn't been charged with either crime. Now that a "loyal Bushie" has been convicted of these crimes, it's no big deal.
..and America is watching TV.
Fact: Valerie Plame was a CIA agent working with an unofficial, undisclosed cover. A secret agent, if you will.
Fact: Valerie Plame's identity and her "secret agent" status was leaked to several members of the media, who publshed this information.
Fact: Outting an undercover CIA agent is a federal crime - a breach of national security because it can seriously hamper the CIA's ability to operate abroad. This crime did, indisputably, take place. The reporters's didn't all suddenly get this information through divine revelation - it was given to them. This is the reason the special prosecutor investigation was initiated in the first place - to find out who leaked Plame's identity to the media.
All evidence collected thus far strongly points to the leak coming from inside the White House. Presumptive motive: to discredit Plame's husband, Wilson, who was publicly discrediting the false intelligence the Administration was using to push for the war in Iraq.
Prosecutor Fitzgerald was unable to pull together enough evidence to definitively charge any one person with revealing Plame's identity. This does not constitute the absence of a crime. The fact that her cover was blown to the media is the crime. The possibility that her career was destroyed as political retribution against her husband makes it a rather petty crime.
Libby was indicted and convicted of lying to a grand jury and obstructing the prosecutor's case. These are crimes - the President himself agreed to this in his statement this evening. He did not dispute the conviction itself. The President didn't go so far as to pardon Libby outright, because it is clear that Libby was guilty of these crimes. For the President to pardon Libby outright would, at this point, be tantamount to announcing that his administration was guilty of the original crime, except that no one would have to face any punishment for it.
There is no constitutional requirement for the state of the union to be a speech.
From Article 2 Section 3
Sounds to me like the president has the power to convene Congress for the purpose of giving a speech. George Washington thought so too; the timing & manner of delivering the State of the Union dates back to the Washington administration.
"Stuff that matters."
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
We'll only see a conviction for the outing of Plame when White House staffers stop perjuring themselves and stone-walling the investigation.
In other words, never...
The real reason Libby was prosecuted is lost on many of the administration's defenders. Many have deluded themselves into believing that Libby's prosecution was some sort of political witch hunt.
This would have to be the first political witch-hunt in history where a Republican politico was prosecuted by a Republican prosecutor, sentenced and jailed by a Republican Judge, and refused bail by an appelate court, the majority of whom were Republicans.
Libby's prosecution wasn't a witch-hunt. Libby was prosecuted because he blocked Fitzgerald's investigation. Libby lied and stone-walled, preventing Fitzgerald from ever getting to the bottom of why Plame was outed.
The "why" is very important. This is because the Intelligence Identities Protection Act only allows prosecution of those who knowingly reveal the identity of a covert agent. Fitzgerald had to prove they knew, but he couldn't reach that level of proof without honest testimony from those involved.
But because Libby lied to the grand jury and FBI, because Karl Rove stone-walled and nearly found himself similarly prosecuted for perjury, Fitzgerald was unable to get enough proof to prosecute any IIPA violations.
Libby's lies probably saved some in the administration from prosecution under the IIPA. That is why Libby was prosecuted for perjury and why no one has been (or probably ever will be) charged for outing Plame under the IIPA.
Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
"In point of fact, Bill Clinton was impeached and disbarred for the same crime."
No. Clinton was not ever accused of Perjury in any court. The Perjury charge was soundly defeated in Senate, even with a majority of Republicans seated. The Obstruction of Justice charge also failed to get a majority in the Republican Senate. The only thing Clinton was accused of in court was Contempt of Court for failing to testify truthfully. Clinton cut a deal for that charge, which would have been tough to prove, since the lawyers questioning Clinton under oath never asked him straight up questions about what they knew he had done.
For example "Mr Clinton, did you ejaculate on Monica Lewinsky's dress?" "Did Monica Lewinsky touch your penis with her mouth?" "Did you touch Monica Lewinsky's vagina with a cigar?"
They knew all these things had happened, because of Linda Tripp's blabbing (not completely sure Tripp knew about the cigar). They could have asked those questions directly and established the facts of Lewinsky's and Clinton's relationship for the civil court. They did not do these things. Instead, they asked highly circular and vague questions that barely, if at all, touched on the situation. "Were you ever alone with Monica Lewinsky? "No" (I was on the phone with Yasser Arafat while she sucked my dick).
The lawyers asked these questions in this odd fashion because they weren't interested in establishing the truth of the matter. As was later ruled by the judge in the case, Clinton's canoodling with Monica had no bearing on the Paula Jones case. Clinton didn't supervise Monica officially, and never did anything official that affected Lewinsky's White House responsibilities. The lawyers were already in substantial possession of the details of what Clinton and Lewinsky did, but did not seek to confirm those detail in a straightforward fashion.
The lawyers asked vague questions because they were hoping to trap the President into Lying Under Oath to avoid revealing politically and personally embarrassing details. If they had asked direct, yes or no questions about the specific behavior they already knew about, Clinton would have realized they had a source, and not tried to weasel his way out of admitting his infidelities. He would have 'fessed up and avoided a big chunk of trouble, although when the lawyers for Jones illegally leaked details of his testimony Clinton would have suffered serious political damage.
But, Clinton was a pretty good lawyer himself, and knew how to parse the truth. Using a dictionary definition, he did not have "sex" with Lewinsky. As far as the touching with intent to arouse, etc., I think a pretty strong defense could have been made that time and personal feelings of shame had clouded Clinton's memory regarding the specific 'blow-by-blow' activities with Lewinsky*. There is no guarantee a charge of Lying Under Oath would have succeeded. I myself doubt it. But there is no question that the process of beating the charge would have been a humiliating one for Bill, and I completely understand his decision to pay a fine and surrender his law license to put it behind him.
Not like he needs to try cases anymore to make a living.
Scooter Libby was tried and convicted of Perjury and Obstruction of Justice. He was accused by a Republican Prosecutor, convicted by a highly sympathetic jury and sentenced by a Republican Judge. No one attempted to entrap or deceive him to get the conviction. The crimes Libby committed had direct bearing and relation to his duties and responsibilities as a Cabinet Officer. Libby continues to cover up the criminality of his superiors, and has just had his sentence commuted to enable him to keep covering up that criminality.
Clinton screwed up. Libby is a convicted criminal. George Bush Jr and Dick Cheney are criminals.
*Scooter Libby tried a similar defense, with less time for forgetting and an amazing ability to remember false details that never happened.
Fundamentalism is a crime against humanity